So while I'd share your belief that Tor project should stay out of this, or better yet, support >RMS, shutting down nodes seems like taking out your punishment on the innocent ones.

This, we already have only a handful of nodes, and even fewer exit nodes, please don't make the situation worse just because of some personal feud. Please reconsider your actions. - William On 25/03/2021, Roman Mamedov <rm@romanrm.net> wrote:

On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 20:06:48 -0600 Jeffrey Cliff <jeffrey.cliff@gmail.com> wrote:

...

I've been running a relay/exit node for many years. Tor user since ~2004. To the extent that my voice means anything at all here, I would like to strongly condemn the Tor project joining the attempt to cancel Richard Stallman. Stallman represents software freedom to me generally and as of today I will be shutting down my exit node in protest of this action by the Tor Project.

I hope the rest of you out there, who depend every day on GNU project code which would not exist without RMS's project, might consider joining me.

Sign the supporting letter: https://rms-support-letter.github.io/

As for Tor, I am not running my nodes "for the Tor project", I'm running them for the end users who need a free and open Internet. So while I'd share your belief that Tor project should stay out of this, or better yet, support RMS, shutting down nodes seems like taking out your punishment on the innocent ones.

-- With respect, Roman _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

I will spin up 2 relays for every relay this guy and other RMS supporters will shut down. nifty

On 25. Mar 2021, at 20:11, Igor Mitrofanov <igor.n.mitrofanov@gmail.com> wrote:

I denounce the Tor Project's political activism under the new administration and this attempt to fuel the cancel culture. I am signing the supporting letter for Richard Stallman and pausing my relays. I realize that this is largely symbolic, but so is running Tor relays in the first place. I am not going to let anyone use my resources in support of censorship. _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

I'll match that as well. This is no reason to discontinue running a relay if you are a true Tor supporter and privacy / anonymity believer. John Ricketts wrote:

I'll match that.

...

On Mar 25, 2021, at 14:37, niftybunny <abuse-contact@to-surf-and-protect.net> wrote:

I will spin up 2 relays for every relay this guy and other RMS supporters will shut down.

nifty

...

On 25. Mar 2021, at 20:11, Igor Mitrofanov <igor.n.mitrofanov@gmail.com> wrote:

I denounce the Tor Project's political activism under the new administration and this attempt to fuel the cancel culture. I am signing the supporting letter for Richard Stallman and pausing my relays. I realize that this is largely symbolic, but so is running Tor relays in the first place. I am not going to let anyone use my resources in support of censorship.

Also, more information would be nice - just some "Please shut down all of your relays, because I / they have a problem with X" isn't very descriptive. Just did some own research: "The group recently reappointed the controversial developer and activist to its board; he had previously departed in the wake of sexual-harassment allegations and comments he made about the Jeffrey Epstein case that many found repellent." Ah, I see, feminists and leftists must be triggered right now, but how does this relate to the Tor Project or Mozilla in anyway? Sure, it's not the best PR for both but if he's a valuable (code) contributor I'd let it slip - anyone remember the Freedom of speech principle? I thought this is why we were doing all this. My relay will still stay online for the time being, but I'd seriously reconsider priorities here - surely, they shouldn't be political - who cares what anyone thinks. - William

Roman Mamedov wrote on 3/26/21 11:10 AM:

Could be important to note that no harassment allegations were ever aimed at RMS himself, he's just being attacked for posting a personal opinion about unrelated events.

The mattress on the floor of his MIT office and the 30 year history of him hitting on and creeping on women beg to differ. His nature was so obvious and so well known that multiple whisper networks sprung up to protect young MIT students from him -- including telling new female undergrads and grad students to ensure that they never, ever, were placed in a room alone with him.  They were literally warning people to not even venture into the *hallway* corridor where his office was located.  One woman's recent story involved her being accidentally the last person left at a table with RMS after a group outing to a buffet meal at an indian restaurant - as soon as RMS was alone with her he told her that he'd commit suicide and she would be responsible for his death if she did not agree to date him. This is the type of creep responsible for driving people out of institutions, scientific fields and academia in general.  How many woman did he drive out of open source or computer science due to his *behavior* over multiple decades? Not even sure why I'm typing this. The people arguing in bad faith that RMS is being cancelled only for opinions and not actions are the same ones who tend to argue that harassment does not exist unless there was an arrest, trial and guilty plea.

On 3/26/21 12:02 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote:

On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 11:26:16 -0400 Chris Dagdigian <dag@sonsorol.org> wrote:

...

telling new female undergrads and grad students to ensure that they never, ever, were placed in a room alone with him.

It is a bad idea to stay alone in a room with a woman these days, regardless :) Rumours or accusations of harassment are actively used to blackmail or to do away with a person who or whose work is not "convenient" to certain parties. Unfortunately he also was unwise to state an unpopular opinion (believed that we have freedom of speech and freedom of thought -- how silly), and made it even easier for them.

Ha. Yes, I get you Roman. We call that "blaming the victims." Some of us are against that. None of this behavior is new. It's afflicted, dehabilitated and even traumitized the community since I've been around. Some louder voices set the tone and throw around the term "freedom of speech", when no one notices how many are marginalized were unheard. I have been involved in the open source community (-ities?) for decades. The difference between ten or twenty years ago and today is that the shitty behavior has now been politicized consciously by the far right, and some others naively follow the meme on the one hand, and others are rallying against this. You don't build community by implicitly and explicitly marginalizing a whole section of it. Sorry. And noisy self-righteous people on mailing lists are a small subsection of the community.

...

This is the type of creep responsible for driving people out of institutions, scientific fields and academia in general.

Creep #1 is massaging hearsay into a weapon to drive a person out of the mission of his entire life, of the mission to improve the world.

...

Not even sure why I'm typing this.

I am sorry if you took my comment as an invitation to discuss the RMS matter in-depth, I don't think the Tor mailing list is the right place.

Right. Great point Roman. This is a relay operators list, yet it's become a stomping ground for those attacking the TPO concern for bringing some sanity to the ecosystem. There's an obvious issue here. Some very loud voices denounce TPO for a position taken, and it's on a relay operators list. A handful of operators (or not?) have politicized the issue and pushed it into the relays mailing list. I propose this thread is closed. Not relevant. And it's become a place for a few to create a faux revolt. g

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 09:02:02PM +0500, Roman Mamedov wrote: :On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 11:26:16 -0400 :Chris Dagdigian <dag@sonsorol.org> wrote: : :> telling new female undergrads and grad students to ensure that they never, :> ever, were placed in a room alone with him. : :It is a bad idea to stay alone in a room with a woman these days, regardless :) Bullshit. It is a bad idea to be in a room alone with Stallman if you're a woman though. I know several people personally who can attest to this and having worke din the same bulding as RMS for 20 years I knwo even more who would actively avoid being in his presence. Obviously hearing me say this is here say but anywhere he shows up I will leave.

Updated the subject line to more accurately reflect the topic. I encourage the moderators of this list to address Roman's abuse of this list, as the repeated postings do not show an effort to communicate in good faith, and repeat sexist tropes against women. The reply below is for the benefit of others who may have been misled by Roman's earlier post. On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 11:10 AM Roman Mamedov <rm@romanrm.net> wrote:

Could be important to note that no harassment allegations were ever aimed at RMS himself, he's just being attacked for posting a personal opinion about unrelated events.

That is incorrect. As posted up-thread, the issue at hand began with an objection (presumably) to thisTwitter post: https://twitter.com/torproject/status/1374754834050654212 ... which leads us here: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ ... and in turn takes us to the appendix here: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/appendix ... which finally leads us here: https://selamjie.medium.com/remove-richard-stallman-appendix-a-a7e41e784f88 Which gives multiple specific instances, some with named accusers, spanning multiple decades. These are examples of behaviors by RMS beyond mailing list posts. Further, "posting a personal opinion" is an action with consequences. You diminish and/or elide that he had/has a leadership position, and that the opinions in question contribute to a hostile work and/or learning environment for women, especially young women, which is not only immoral but actionable under law in the USA. MIT and FSF have a duty to maintain an equitable work and learning environment along sex, gender, and other lines or else open themselves to liability for his abhorrent communication contributing to a sexualized space. Freedom of Speech does not and should not protect abusers from consequences. This is simple. Leadership is a privilege, and leaders should be held to a high standard. That standard has not been met here, and interested parties have signed on to a clear letter, which again, is here: https://rms-open-letter.github.io/ and I encourage you all (especially those who are spending time defending RMS here) to read (or re-read). Your defense should be of F/LOSS tools such as Tor, not individuals such as RMS. Thanks, -- Cristóbal Palmer ibiblio.org

Everything is political, the Freedom of speech is political. The Freedom of speech doesn't give someone the right to harm someone. RMS has his past and what he has done for the Open Source community will always be remembered, but it does not mean that we should accept his bad behavior. - Kubiaki Em sex., 26 de mar. de 2021 às 15:33, Matthew Finkel < matthew.finkel@gmail.com> escreveu:

On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 2:49 PM William Kane <ttallink@googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Also, more information would be nice - just some "Please shut down all of your relays, because I / they have a problem with X" isn't very descriptive.

Just did some own research:

"The group recently reappointed the controversial developer and activist to its board; he had previously departed in the wake of sexual-harassment allegations and comments he made about the Jeffrey Epstein case that many found repellent."

Ah, I see, feminists and leftists must be triggered right now, but how does this relate to the Tor Project or Mozilla in anyway? Sure, it's not the best PR for both but if he's a valuable (code) contributor I'd let it slip - anyone remember the Freedom of speech principle?

That's unfortunate because this attitude is counter to the Tor community we are building:

https://gitweb.torproject.org/community/policies.git/tree/statement_of_value...

""" Community health is a shared responsibility. By making the community more inclusive and welcoming, we build a stronger and more resilient Tor. Perfection is not required; a commitment to continuous improvement and learning is. """

We can't simply "turn the other cheek" because we must be better than that. We cannot let misconduct and offenses "slip" for the sake of (code) contribution. We do not live in a cypherpunk/meritocratic crypto-utopia of the 1990s.

...

I thought this is why we were doing all this.

There isn't one single reason why people contribute and volunteer within and around the Tor community. However, that may be your reason for volunteering your time and resources.

...

My relay will still stay online for the time being, but I'd seriously reconsider priorities here - surely, they shouldn't be political - who cares what anyone thinks.

I'm sorry, but Tor is actually a policy statement and its implementation: anonymity-by-default, privacy-by-design, censorship circumvention; Tor is not a neutral party in the debate on free access to cryptography.

The Tor Project having (and voicing) an opinion on these topics, as well as other topics within the larger free software community, are not out of scope and, this should not be a surprise.

I hope you continue running your relay and continue supporting the Tor network and its users. Your contribution makes the network stronger for everyone. _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

I believe to have observed a worrying pattern lately. A small number of people select a person for a perceived or actual wrongdoing and do their best at destroying their target's lives though any and all means available. Including by exerting pressure on their target's workplace to throw the target out, shun them, destroying them completely. This group of attackers usually comes with a larger group of followers on certain "social" networks. Too often the initially innocent bystanders give in to the attacks out of fear of becoming themselves a target of the attackers. They grant the attacker's wish and (consciously or not) become accomplice of the attacker. I am under the impression this might be the case here. RMS may or may not have said something bad, I don't want to get into that. As far as I heard, the accusations are limited to RMS having stated an opinion, not having actually done something. A "mob" decided to destroy him, and my impression is that TPO is now giving in and gives RMS another media-effective shove while others are in the process of throwing him under the bus, in an attempt at virtue-signalling to the attackers, so they'd leave TPO alone. It looks like an example of falling victim to divide and conquer. There are strong enemies of privacy, freedom of speech, civil liberties out there. We should try fighting them instead of fighting amongst one another, fighting someone who has done a priceless job for the free software movement for many many years. My 2 modest guard/mid relays will keep running independent of this embarrassing issue.